does have pvp??

[MrGiio98 YT]

..

[DeadBeat61]

No, because it would be unbalanced. Human Fighters would dominate the ladder and little babby Tiefling Bards would cry.

[KirGeo]

No its a single player or co-op multiplayer game. It is possible to damage party members. So you can attack each other in a sense but not full on PvP.

[WeenerTuck813]

Is first people shooter?
..

[katzenkrimis]

Originally posted by twitch.tv/mrgiio98:

PvP?

It would end up like Lord of the Rings Online.

Another dead MMO.

[breadman]

no, it has pvb

player vs bear

[Mister Inadequate]

Originally posted by katzenkrimis:

It would end up like Lord of the Rings Online.

Another dead MMO.

How many people are still playing LOTRO?
The LOTRO population has seen a resurgence over the last year or so and is currently quite healthy with around 100K active players. There are plenty of players to join up with in LOTRO. LOTRO has an average of around 1000 concurrent players on Steam according to Steam Charts, which is decent for an older MMO.Feb 2, 2023

[Yojo0o]

5e really isn't balanced for pvp.

[cire87]

DOS2 had an arena you could do some minor pvp if your playing co-op its was interesting

[Ghost]

Originally posted by Mister Inadequate:

How many people are still playing LOTRO?
The LOTRO population has seen a resurgence over the last year or so and is currently quite healthy with around 100K active players. There are plenty of players to join up with in LOTRO. LOTRO has an average of around 1000 concurrent players on Steam according to Steam Charts, which is decent for an older MMO.Feb 2, 2023

LOTRO itself may be pretty healthy, but the PVP scene has been pretty dead for a long time.

Originally posted by KirGeo:

No its a single player or co-op multiplayer game. It is possible to damage party members. So you can attack each other in a sense but not full on PvP.

^ Nothing dedicated, much like it was in D:OS2. If you really want to, you can.

[ExcaliburV]

I guess you can. You willing to lose your friends over it?

[Dragon Master]

Originally posted by DeadBeat61:

No, because it would be unbalanced. Human Fighters would dominate the ladder and little babby Tiefling Bards would cry.

Actually, monks would dominate for one very simple reason.

Stunning strike.

Less useful against high-level monsters because they usually have the Constitution to resist but player characters, unless they are a barbarian, usually can't reliably save against the flurry of blows (pun intended) that a monk can dish out.

Once stunned, every attack against them has advantage, they lose their turn and any reactions until the start of the monk's next turn, at which point stunning strike will be hitting again (or until the monk runs out of ki points).

[cire87]

i had an epic battle with a friend in DOS2 arena , we were both super over powered in different ways , i dont remember our builds

[DeadBeat61]

Originally posted by Dragon Master:

Originally posted by DeadBeat61:

No, because it would be unbalanced. Human Fighters would dominate the ladder and little babby Tiefling Bards would cry.

Actually, monks would dominate for one very simple reason.

Stunning strike.

Less useful against high-level monsters because they usually have the Constitution to resist but player characters, unless they are a barbarian, usually can't reliably save against the flurry of blows (pun intended) that a monk can dish out.

Once stunned, every attack against them has advantage, they lose their turn and any reactions until the start of the monk's next turn, at which point stunning strike will be hitting again (or until the monk runs out of ki points).

Unless the Monk is a human, they'll break their hands punching because all other species have hollow, brittle bones. And no self-respecting human would be caught dead playing anything other than the objectively superior Fighter class. The combination of Action Surge and the human's +20 weight capacity allows them to carry all of the things, and in PVP that means carrying their team to victory.

[Kitnal]

Originally posted by DeadBeat61:

Originally posted by Dragon Master:

Actually, monks would dominate for one very simple reason.

Stunning strike.

Less useful against high-level monsters because they usually have the Constitution to resist but player characters, unless they are a barbarian, usually can't reliably save against the flurry of blows (pun intended) that a monk can dish out.

Once stunned, every attack against them has advantage, they lose their turn and any reactions until the start of the monk's next turn, at which point stunning strike will be hitting again (or until the monk runs out of ki points).

Unless the Monk is a human, they'll break their hands punching because all other species have hollow, brittle bones. And no self-respecting human would be caught dead playing anything other than the objectively superior Fighter class. The combination of Action Surge and the human's +20 weight capacity allows them to carry all of the things, and in PVP that means carrying their team to victory.

I know this is satire but a monk outclasses the fighter if they get higher initiative thanks to stunning strike. Monk is the PvP dnd champion which is hilarious because outside of that? it isn't that great at all xD

[Omence072]

It's pvg... Player vs Gayle